Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

AOL Tests Video Instant Messaging

Posted by michael on Sat Apr 12, 2003 02:52 AM
from the LOL-ROFL-AFK dept.
America Online The Internet
An anonymous coward writes "AOL, which only last week asked the FCC to forget about some of those mandatory restrictions put into place in order to clear its merger with Time Warner, apparently isn't wasting any time. In a move that circumvents government-imposed limitations on "advanced" multimedia services, Instant Messaging Planet is reporting that AOL has already started beta testing video messaging services with "push-to-talk" and "record-and-forward" features."
+ -
unknown
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

AOL Tests Video Instant Messaging 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Fast? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 12 2003, @02:54AM (#5715396)
    If it has faster framerates and quality than Yahoo Messenger, I'm sold.

    It seems most of the world uses AIM, though they stick with OTHER IM clients for their perks like videoconferencing.

    • Re:Fast? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Per Wigren (5315)
      It seems most of the world uses AIM

      I don't know about that.. I don't know a single person in Sweden who uses AIM.. Most people don't even know what it is.. Everyone I know with an internet connection is using ICQ, which is almost synonymous with "instant messaging" here.. But it is slowly changing to MSN because it comes with the default install of Windows.. :P
      • Well since AOL sowns ICQ now also the whole world basically DOES use AIM. Last I heard AOL was working on (done now?) getting AIM and ICQ to communicate with each other. I imagine the video IM technology they develop will trickle into ICQ also.
        • It depends entirely on your country - AIM in the US and most countries, but in the UK, MSN is the *ONLY* IM - random people in nightclubs most likely have it, but NOBODY has anything else.

  • catchup (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ramzak2k (596734) on Saturday April 12 2003, @02:55AM (#5715399)
    All they are attempting is a catch up with MSN messenger & yahoo. This doesnt look like a big money maker given the competition.
    • And MSN Messenger and Yahoo IM'er are trying to catch up with every webcam portal out there that have been around for at least 3 years now. I think this will all eventually catch on but only after AOL starts giving away free webcames with their free CD's. Ok maybe it won't catch on then.
    • All they are attempting is a catch up with MSN messenger & yahoo. This doesnt look like a big money maker given the competition.

      From my homework, I haven't seen anyone who is making money with IM, video or not. Its a net loss for everyone involved, except you and I as consumers. Frankly, I am not sure why they bother unless they think it is bringing in revenue in other areas. If I owned stock in MSN, Yahoo or AOL, I would prefer they get out of the IM business or develop a business model that allow
    • Maybe that will be part of their stance. If all the other messaging services already have these features, is it really fair to call it "advanced"?

  • Blah... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Yag (537766) on Saturday April 12 2003, @02:57AM (#5715403)
    Netmeeting and h323 video stuff is there from a lot of time but people still prefer using mirc or icq. I dont think most people is happy to show theit face (especially in the morning...).
          • And also, we should all start surfing the Internet Explorer after checking our Outlook (hint: Outlook not good).

  • FCC? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mr100percent (57156) on Saturday April 12 2003, @02:57AM (#5715404) Homepage Journal
    When did AOL suddenly have the ability to forget what the FCC ruled?

    Seriously, is the FCC a useless appendage to the government?
    Look at how Radio has deteriorated in the last 20 years.
    I still get interference between cordless phones, wireless videocameras, and 802.11 wireless.
    Look at the way cursing is handled on tv.

      • I'd say it's less "big government" and more "Welcome to CorpWorld, today's special is three senators for a million dollars, Republican or Democrat!"

  • missing an important link? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mr100percent (57156) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:00AM (#5715411) Homepage Journal
    AOL asks FCC to OK Video IM [internet.com]

  • horrible implications...... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Lord_Dweomer (648696) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:00AM (#5715414) Homepage
    jesus....you know all that IM spam you get? you know the kind

    SeXygrl4u:Hi, I'm Cindy and I just got a digital camera. I took some REALLY hot photos of myself. Come see my webcam at http://www.goatse.cx.com!!

    Well, now imagine the IM of the future.....

    (cue video of fat balding man in a blonde wig and a schoolgirl's outfit. (voice of man talking in heavy N.Y. accent)
    SeXygrl4u:"Yo, I'm Cindy, and i just got a new camera to take some freakin pictures with. Check them out on my site OR ELSE! There's some really hot pictures of me playing with my girlfriends. Together, we are some of the hottest teens on the WEB!"

    Innovation indeed..............

  • I'll just get it out of the way...

    1. Promise to do one thing.
    2. Do your best to undo those promises.
    3. Profit!

  • Internet dating (Score:5, Funny)

    by Johnso (520335) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:02AM (#5715416)
    You just know that video-trolling is going to be the next big thing.

    "Hi!! I'm a 14 y/o cheerleader lookin' to cyber. Wanna videochat?"
    [Goatse guy comes on screen.]
    "Ahhhh!"

    AOL's gonna need a puke emoticon or two.


    • Ever since all the hype about video phones, I've been ready for this. I bought costumes and backdrops and everything. DAMN THE CONSUMERS FOR THERE SLOW ADAPTION OF CLEARLY SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY!

      No, I'm serious I've been waiting for this. :-D
      • Herman Costa [riccomaresca.com]---- ---mixup [mixup.org.uk] ---- ---Sasa Markovic [remont.co.yu]---- --- Rolf Behme [rolfbehme.de]

      • No, I'm serious I've been waiting for this. :-D

        When I hear of video phones, once again I think of the Simpsons. Lisa's future, getting married, talking to Mom, who keeps crossing her fingers when she talks and Lisa has to keep reminding her that she can her, its a video phone. Harder to lie to the boss when you call in sick and he sees you with your sunglasses on, and baseball tickets in hand. oops!

        I am not sure that I want people to see me in my natural habitat (underwear, no shower til 3), and more

  • Push to talk? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:02AM (#5715417)
    The push to talk feature skirts the "No videoconferencing" rule since you're recording a short video clip and sending it over. It's not live really.
  • I think i'll have to pass... or at least wait until its fully tested and complete. AIM betas are notorious for causing a tremendous amount of crashes.

  • Security (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Mattygfunk1 (596840) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:06AM (#5715425) Homepage
    What I have wanted for ages now is a "business level" IM service that is available for free. I hate the idea that my IMs are free to read by anyone with the inclination, and I don't see why more companies don't encrypt it. Yahoo offers this service as a business package, but it obviously needs to be on both sides to be secure and my mates won't pay for it.

    Can anyone give me the name of a product that fits this criteria? Linux version?

    ____
    cheap web site hosting [cheap-web-...ing.com.au] from $3

    • Well, it doesn't rhyme with Troll [astrian.net]...

      But you're talking about Jabber [jabber.org].

    • Jabber (Score:4, Informative)

      by roro_parnucious (534079) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:26AM (#5715463)
      Have you looked at Jabber?

      Opensource:
      http://www.jabber.org

      Commercial Support:
      http://www.jabber.com

      You can set up a Jabber server, connect securely to
      it from Jabber IM clients, and (if you wish) have the
      server translate out to AIM, MSN, Y!M, etc.

      Translations to other services will not be secure, of
      course, unless the external server supported such a
      thing ( to my knowledge Y!, MS and AOL do not ).
      • Opensource:
        http://www.jabber.org

        Jabber is not "Opensource". It is an open standard, with both Open Source and porprietary client and server software in existance.

        Just to be clear ;)
    • GAIM lets you log in to all the services Jabber lets you log into, and has had a plugin that uses GPG to encrypt your text, not the protocol.

      If you want to put the pieces together, GAIM now runs under Windows. GAIM-e has provided GPG integration for GAIM on Linux for a long time and was recently ported to Windows. All you need now is the GAIM-e for Windows package and GPG for Windows. If you're not inclined to use the CLI, you can use Windows Privacy Tray, a GUI wrapper for GPG for Windows now part of Wind
      • I have it. But you have to be able to establish a direct connection with the other person. And if you're both running iptables/$windows_firewall then you're out of luck.

        Something else I've started trying to write is a GPG plugin for licq. Now that would make more sense. But I'm not good enough at C++ to do it. If anyone would like to help out with this, please visit my site, and leave a comment somewhere.

  • Hrmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by acehole (174372) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:09AM (#5715434) Homepage
    I wonder if they're going to learn from the folly that was 'Microsoft Netmeeting'.

    That degraded into a place of seeing countless people jerking off, flashing and other lude acts.

  • Beta Tester (Score:4, Informative)

    by seeksoft (579626) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:11AM (#5715440)
    You can actually get the latest build of this beta software from Keyword: beta. Once you are accepted the code name of the application (AOL for BROADBAND / AOL PLUS / AOL SERVICE PACK 1 / AOL 9.0) is actually named Blue Hawaii. The GUI is all blue, And the service has totaly gone through a new face lift from the 8.0 version. I must say I do like the features they are implenting. As the question asked before about the video streams, if both users have broadband connections, the video is actually as good as MS Netmeeting. Its not always the speed of the service, but the frame rate of your camera. Cheaper the camera, slower the frame rate. This beta also includes the many of the fun features of AIM. File transfers, Direct Connect to send pictures, Voice Chat, and a new feature (Webcams). I'm also going to add the latest beta of AIM has resolved most of firewall issues people were having. There are 3 different ways to connect to someone now. It solved all of my issues with my home network firewall and my office firewall. Looks like AOL is on the right track to getitng its service going. The next major feature will be McAfee implenmented into the email service like msn and yahoo currently do. That beta test is going pretty smooth. I just cant wait till they start streaming movies. These large trailers they keep releasing (animatrix / matrix) Rumor is its just a test of what kind of bandwidth they will need. Start small, then go big I guess. Should be intresting how AOL begins the climb back to the top. and out of curiosity, I know we all love to hate it, how many of us actully DO USE AOL? steve

  • Well... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Linguica (144978) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:26AM (#5715464)
    Maybe I'll actualy enjoy receiving porno spam IMs.

    Oh, baby.

  • Very slightly off-topic.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Boss, Pointy Haired (537010) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:33AM (#5715476)
    Do any of these instant messaging systems/protocols support the exposure of a different online "status" to different groups of buddies?

    For example, I use Messenger at work, and it would be useful to allow my colleagues to see me as "Online", whilst my friends outside of work see me as "Busy".

    I think Buddy Groups would be easier than having to create a separate account (one for work and one for use with friends), and in particular if you have a large number of friends on IM you don't want to have to set your status to Busy for them individually.

    Then at lunchtime, I can quickly set my "Friends" Buddy Group to show me as "Online"...

    • Re:Very slightly off-topic.... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Do any of these instant messaging systems/protocols support the exposure of a different online "status" to different groups of buddies?

      ICQ [icq.com] does, at least on a per-user level; e.g. you can set things up so that Joe sees you as "away," Jerry thinks you're "offline," but Jenny (who you hope to be setting up a date with) sees you as "online." I'm not sure whether or not there's a group functionality built into ICQ, I've never looked for it or needed it.

      Note: you have to use the full client, "ICQ Lite" does no

  • aol & icq (Score:5, Informative)

    by nsda's_deviant (602648) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:35AM (#5715478)
    its amazing that AOL is circumventing the FCC rules, I was pretty disapointed when AOL IM protocol wasn't forced open during the merger but this is ridiculous. To brashlly declare it doesnt hold a dominant control over IM, have they forgotten about AOL IM & ICQ???

    News.com article [com.com]
    "The petition argues that AOL's IM services, AOL Instant Messenger and ICQ, face more competition from Microsoft and Yahoo, both of which have launched video conferencing features on their respective IM clients. The petition also disputes the order's original argument that AOL's dominance would increase given the lack of interoperability, now that MSN and Yahoo have amassed millions of users as well.

    "There is no longer any plausible reason to conclude either that AOL is dominant or that the market is in danger of 'tipping' to AOL," said Northwestern University professor William P. Rogerson, who provided an affidavit on behalf of AOL Time Warner. "

    also alarming, William P. Rogerson [northwestern.edu] is the Chief Economist of the FCC [fcc.gov]
    • It's also amazing that Microsoft is allowed to circumvent anything they want. It's 10 times the monopoly AOL is. Sure, it would be nice to see AOL opening the IM protocol, but even better if MS opened the Office document formats.

      I live in Europe and know more people that use MSN than ICQ or AIM. On the other hand, everybody I know uses MS Windows.

      So now, who has a monopoly where?
  • They're supposed to not compete due to arbitrary restrictions set (in terms of Internet time) eons ago?

    The IM landscape isn't the same as it was a year ago or even two years ago. Thanks to cheap high spec PCs, USB webcams and cheap high speed internet, the once expensive realm of videoconfrencing is now a dime-a-dozen.

    Why should they not be allowed to compete now that everything to do videoconfrencing is easy and ubiquitous?
      • The IM landscape suffers from the same "network effects" that pervade(d) the operating system market.

        Since when was there a law disallowing me to use more than one IM at a time?

        If the program is good enough then you'll see a large group of early adopters that run two IMs at once. Then they start telling the cosmopolitan friends how "cool" this other IM is and all the "cool features" it has.

        Then the other friends switch over or figure out how to use two IMs and tell all their friends.

        Process continues a

  • Lol... this will fail miserably... heres why (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rooked_One (591287) on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:53AM (#5715501) Journal
    people that tend to use AOL like to hide behind their computer. Its the whole "I can be whomever I want behind this computer screen" syndrome that apeals to so many. THERE ARE STUDIES that prove this.

    By using video cameras and incorporating it into the newly released AOL broadband, they are trying to apeal to a certain niche. I would think they would have studies to tell them that this is a horrible idea and it will not work becuase guys can't pretend to be girls and ugly girls can't pretend to be really hot. I'm sure I don't need to point out that short film - "The Parlor"

    People just won't use it. Those that do and happen to be good looking will get so sick of people without webcam's spaming them with messages all day long they will just take it down.

    SOrry AOL - not this time.

    • Re:Lol... this will fail miserably... heres why (Score:4, Insightful)

      by StupidGoose (650732) on Saturday April 12 2003, @04:04AM (#5715516)
      You must remember that AOL's targets are those families who just bought a new Compaq, and want to "get on that Internet thing" to help the kids with their homework, book airline tickets and send e-mail to grandma and gramps(Finding porn too, but Pop will keep that a secret). They don't know what a server is. They couldn't care less how TCP/IP handshaking works. All they know is that AOL lets you get access to this wonderful thing. And AOL knows this. Can you imagine the difference made by advertising "Send instant messages to friends and family", with a picture of a guy entering letters, and the advertisement where the entire family sits in front of a tiny camera on top of the monitor, talking directly to their relatives on the other side of the country? I can.

  • AIM vs. Other IM Services (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 12 2003, @03:58AM (#5715509)
    I'm a frequent user of AIM, ICQ, IRC, Yahoo IM, and MSN Messenger.

    That being said, I used to use IRC all the time. I had a lot of friends there and it seemed like the place to be. Unfortunately, the packet kiddies have made it extrordinarily unreliable.

    ICQ was the next place I frequented. Unfortunately, it's a haven for spammers. It's the only IM service I get spam from. It's pretty reliable, but most of the people that are relatively new to the internet don't have ICQ numbers. So it's not particularly useful anymore, although a few years ago, it too was the place to be.

    I've used Yahoo IM, but unfortunately it seems rather pointless to me. I don't know why, I've just never been a fan of it. Yahoo's official client seems rather slow and I have problems connecting to the service rather often. I also find people I know just don't use it that much.

    That brings me to the two I use a lot now, those being AIM and MSN Messenger.

    I like AIM. I really do. Its client for Linux is rather lacking, but a lot of people have it. It doesn't seem as bloated as ICQ, but it still has a lot of features. And you can bet just about anyone online has an AIM SN. The service is rather reliable, too, I've found.

    As for MSN Messenger, it's really become my favorite IM service. I know I'll probably get modded down for being pro-Microsoft, but it does everything I need it to do and aside from the few times it's gone down for maintainence, it's also rather reliable of late. I like it more than AIM just because it doesn't have the rather stupid features like warnings. I've never really understood that or the rate limiting feature. I mean, I know how they work but I don't get the point of them. I've never seen warnings used against obscene or harassing users. I only see them used when someone is mad at someone else and does it as a way to get back at them. MSN doesn't have these stupid features. That's why I like it. And most people I know have MSN Messenger, too.

    As for Netmeeting, as an op in some teen channels, I see lots of requests to chat on Netmeeting. I get sick of seeing the requests. It's a home for perverts. Yahoo is turning into that, too. Video chats are nice, but with a low quality webcam and an upstream that just sucks (128 kbit) and lots of friends on dialup, it's rather pointless. And no amount of compression will make it much better without making the quality thoroughly suck. Forget it.

    I'll still use AIM, but it's just another pointless feature I'll never use.
    • I like AIM. I really do. Its client for Linux is rather lacking, but a lot of people have it. It doesn't seem as bloated as ICQ, but it still has a lot of features. And you can bet just about anyone online has an AIM SN. The service is rher reliable, too, I've found.

      Other good clients for Linux are Everybuddy, which does AIM/ICQ/IRC/MSN/Yahoo (the big 5), and GAIM, which does AIM/Jabber. On Mac OS X the AIM client from AOL just plain rocks, it's got intelligent design that blows the win32/linux clients

      • Re:AIM vs. Other IM Services (Score:4, Informative)

        by fader (107759) <{moc.poptoh} {ta} {redaf}> on Saturday April 12 2003, @05:22AM (#5715599) Homepage
        GAIM, which does AIM/Jabber

        Just FYI, GAIM has a plugin archetecture that lets it support just about anything. Out of the box it supports AIM (TOC and OSCAR), ICQ, Yahoo!, MSN, IRC, Jabber, Napster, Zephyr, and Gadu-Gadu. Not to mention that you can get plugins to do everything from spell checking to automagically forwarding messages (via a rule-based system) to a cellphone or email. Plus the newest version has a much nicer UI than any other Linux IM client I've ever used.

        (Sorry to shill for GAIM, but the name causes most people to assume it's AIM only, but it's not, and it flat-out r0x0rz :)

  • Apple's iChat (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ciryon (218518) on Saturday April 12 2003, @04:37AM (#5715557) Journal
    Apple's iChat use the same protocol as AIM (OSCAR if I'm not mistaken) and there have been some rumors [macrumors.com] about video for it too. Perhaps Apple and AOL are working together on this one?

    Ciryon

  • The audio over internet to phone phase seemed to work but being free the companies didn't survive.

    Why not just audio chat. The bandwidth would be much lower. The jerky video that modem users have would make this useless.

  • A web page devoted to IM? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Quarters (18322) on Saturday April 12 2003, @08:48AM (#5715840)
    There is an "Instant Messaging Planet" web page. Now I'm off to search for that elusive technology reporting website, "POTS Handset World"!

  • Tivejo (Score:3, Informative)

    by Thing 1 (178996) on Saturday April 12 2003, @11:55AM (#5716374) Journal
    My wife uses Tijevo ("I see you" in Portuguese) to communicate with her friends in Brazil. The program includes video as well as "push to speak" in chat rooms.

    People take turns talking, there's a "hand" icon to note who's next in line, each room has a "manager" who keeps order, and most of the room are music-oriented: people will start talking, say hi to their friends and a bit of background, then play a song.

    Listening to the music there, and then going to Kazaa, she has gotten several CDs worth of music she wouldn't be exposed to otherwise. Obviously it would be nice if there was a way to pay the musician without having to buy the CD (and few of these are local bands, so she can't go to their shows), but it's broadening her musical tastes and also helping her learn English.

    • Re:icqphone for linux? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Unfortunately, no. However, perhaps you could convince your friends to use Netmeeting? There's a similar client for Linux called GnomeMeeting (http://www.gnomemeeting.org) that provides all the functionality of Netmeeting, along with the compatibility.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.